1. Field of the Invention
The present invention is directed to a computer-based tracking system, and more specifically to a construction tracking and payment method and system for coordinating work done on a project and payment therefor.
2. Discussion of the Background
In known construction projects, each month all contractors and subcontractors on large construction projects throughout the country submit applications for payment to architects and owners for review and payment. On large construction projects there are a large number of applications that the architect and the general contractor must review separately to determine if payments should be made. These applications are broken down in terms of materials, labor, and areas of the project completed. They are very lengthy and complex at times. Different (sub)contractors can break down the building or project into differently defined areas. This causes the problem that the architect and general contractor must analyze each of the many applications without the benefit of any correlation of work between (sub)contractors. (In the present application, since the jobs of subcontractors and contractors can be interchangeable depending on the size of a job, the term (sub)contractor will be used throughout to refer to either.) Further, this is often disruptive if done in the middle of a busy construction site. This results in a time-consuming and inefficient analysis of what work has been completed and often results in payment for work that has not actually been performed.
Traditional Application and Certificate for Payment requests consist of two forms (known as G702 and G703) from the American Institute of Architects. FIGS. 1A, 1B and 2 are completed simulated copies of form G702 and G703, respectively, for a mythical Joplin Concrete Company and will be used to describe the traditional payment approach as well as the operation of the present invention. (Blank forms G702 and G703 are incorporated herein in their entirety by reference.) FIGS. 1A and 1B include a summary of the administrative portions of the contract for a job, including the name of the construction project, the name and address of the owner of the construction project, the name and address of the architect, and the name (and optionally address) of the contractor requesting payment. In the section entitled Contractor's Application for Payment, the form includes a summary of the costs associated with the contractor's work. Although a summary is provided in this section, the actual costs are broken down in more detail in terms of units of work on Form G703, as shown in FIG. 2. Line 1 of Joplin Concrete Co.'s application in FIG. 1A states that the contract as a whole was worth $95,000, which is the sum of the Scheduled Value column, column C, in FIG. 2, excluding any Change Orders. (Change Orders are requests for modifications which are authorized by the architect on site and/or the owner and usually arise as a result unforseen or unforeseeable design choices. Since they are unforseen or unforeseeable, they are not part of the original contract and must be administered as the changes occur.) As seen in FIG. 2, the total of column C is $96,000, but this includes a single $1,000 change that was not part of the original contract. Therefore, Line 1 of FIG. 1A states that the original contract was worth $95,000 while Line 2 shows the value of all the changes is $1,000. The correlation of these numbers has traditionally been the responsibility of the subcontractor to keep right, but the reviewer also has to verify their accuracy to avoid payment above the agreed upon price.
Each month, besides adding change orders to the Form G703, the amount of work completed must be updated. Column D of FIG. 2 is updated by adding columns D and E of the previous application and entering the values, item-by-item, into column D. Column E is then updated to reflect the work completed in the current billing period (usually a month). When the reviewer does not have a copy of the previous application at the time of review, it is difficult for the reviewer to know if the values in column D have been correctly filled-in. As such, discrepancies in the amount of performed versus worked may be overlooked because the previous amount of work completed is inadvertently incorrect. If the reviewer tries to track both reports, the review process becomes even more cumbersome since twice the number of reports must be carried.
Column F of FIG. 2 represents the amount of materials stored on the site that have not yet been put into place. For example, in the case of the mythical concrete company, supplies such as yet-to-be used concrete may be stored on the site and represent a future reimbursable expenditure for the subcontractor. FIG. 2 has four work entries for concrete forms and accessories, each with some materials stored on the site. The contractor also has four work entries for cast-in-place concrete that each have materials stored on site. Traditionally, it could be difficult for a reviewer to know exactly what materials go with which work item since (sub)contractors have been free to break down a construction site in a fashion which suits them rather than the owner or architect.
The first part of column G of FIG. 2 represents the total value of the stored materials plus the work that has been done so far. The second part of column G includes the percentage completion of the contracted work as a whole (work plus materials). Column H includes the balance for the remaining work. Column I includes the retainage--i.e., the amount of money set aside until the contract has been completed and signed off by the architect. This money is held to ensure that the last of the work is completed. In the example, the retainage is 10 percent of the work completed so far.
When the calculations have been complete on the Form G703 (or on multiple Forms G703 when the details run more than one page as is often the case), the totals are summarized in lines 4-9 of form G702. The total work completed is entered on Line 4 of FIG. 1A. The total retainage so far is entered on Line 5a. The value of the stored materials is entered on Line 5b. The total exclusions from payments for retainage and stored materials is added to the total line for Line 5. Line 6 is calculated as the difference between the work done so far and the retainage. Line 7 is carried over from line 6 in the previous application. As was described above, this is difficult to verify on site without carrying both reports. Line 8 is calculated as a difference between lines 6 and 7. Finally, the balance is calculated as the difference between Lines 3 and 6. As is readily apparent, the amount of work that is involved in generating each Application and Certificate for Payment is substantial, but the amount of work to verify each application from multiple contractors and subcontractors is even more substantial since the applications are not correlated and may be segmented as many ways as there are (sub)contractors.